Yeah, and it seems like there were authors trying to compare Intel to ARMH for months, telling us how puny ARMH is compared to Intel. And I pointed out, that Intel's competition is not ARMH, but Qualcomm and Samsung, companies with more money than Intel. Funny that now its recognized that Intel's threat is not from the little ARMH, but those that have embraced the powerful embedded IP they licencse. Not sure how anyone ever thought differently.

Well, you already know my position on this, and I know this is all public knowledge, but GloFo did already have 14nm samples at CES, so if they are that far along with engineering samples of 14nm, where does it put them in the convenient timeline of deploying the 20nm feature size. If 14nm has already been demonstrated on that 20nm line, that 20nm line must have been pretty mature, as so many other articles have reported. Does this author have some real world industry insight that none of the other authors have?

GloFo has been working directly with ARM for years already, to optimize the 20nm production line for ARM IP. This is where GloFo sees the real growth, not matching TSMCs 28nm. It would make sense for them to accelerate deployment of 20nm over 28nm. I also see they are "on track" for 10nm in 2015, should be interesting to say the least.

I for one, am just happy to see than the author could write an article that is not overly biased towards Nvidia and Intel, and does not bash AMD. Incredible! Titan might be useless jab in there, but its a nonsense product anyway. The single AMD HD7970GE comes close to it in FPS in most games and actually beats the Titan in compute performance, which is absolutely hilarious!!!! The Titan is superior in some computing applications, but look how badly the HD7970GE simply destroys the GTX 680, which is not even a competitor. The HD7970GE is clearly the best value out there in performance.

Nvidia did not make the first quad core processor. Maybe you mean quad core ARM15 based processor or something of little significance like that.

How do these two sentences go together?"AMD expects the restructuring action which costs $90 million will result in operational savings of approximately $190 million in 2013. Therefore the restructuring may cause cash flow problem for AMD."

They pay $90M and save $190M. Am I missing something?

"From a technology standpoint, AMD is in an unfamiliar market with no particular advantage."

AMD has a HUGE advantage, they have the only 64-bit tablet processors, and only real performance x86 option for an actual mobile tablet. The Temash tablet APU is far ahead of the compeition.

"AMD is apparently not the top player in the tablet market."

What kind of cheap shot is this? They only just entered the market, you might be singing a different tune this time next year.

"However, the situation is mostly due to the low margin on game console graphic chips so that Intel does not bother to compete. The overall game console sales is most likely uninspiring as Nintendo (NTDOY.PK) recently cut Wii U sales forecast by 1.5 million."

This is absurd, what is considered low margin? Do you know what AMD makes for each one? I am guessing not. Intel CANNOT compete, they have no viable product or technology. AMD simply beats Intel hands down in the gaming world. You have no legitimate argument here. No other company in the world can put together a gaming rig by themselves. No other company has a CPU, chipset, and GPU combination that can compete with AMD. And a reduction of 1.5M in sales forecast does not paint the picture of total gaming consoles that will be sold year over year. A 1.5M reduction from what?

You have this under server processors, but these are consumer CPUs. What you will find with the Opterons is that AMD is also at the top of value in that segment as well. Value has not translated into profits for AMD, but very soon their performance should also see a nice jump, making them more competitive in overall IPC performance.

"I believe Windows tablet and PlayStation 4 are not possible to turnaround AMD. My opinion is to sell."

Its a good thing AMD competes in a lot more than those two things, and you have even mentioned several of them.

Is this a balanced view if you only consider one product line AMD has captured? How about the other new markets they are penetrating this year? Or even considering only the PS4 win, had you considered the data center wins associated with running Sony's streaming network, likely to go to AMD. And then if new games are optimized for Radeon GPUs, which use an open architecture that Nvidia or anyone can design for, then AMD discrete GPU sales should improve by 2014. That one win, may be 3 wins in reality. And if MSFT also goes towards a streaming strategy, and has AMD inside the Xbox 720, then even more game titles will be optimized how Radeon GPUs work, and Microsoft will be thinking of using AMD data centers.

But you still need to look at their new tablet market they are leading, the performance tablet/hybrid, and are likely to continue to increase shares of low cost laptops, thin and lites.

But where AMD wins, is threefold. First it sells the hardware in the consoles, second it sells the data centers to Sony to run their streaming network, and three all of the games developed are optimized for Radeon technology. Sony wins by getting better hardware at a lower price than Intel and Nvidia.

I dont think you are going to see LTE anything for $350, unless youre buying it with a new 2 year cellular plan, where the service provider eats the upfront hardware cost, and charges you $50 a month or more, so they make their money back in about 6 months and pocket the next 18 in earnings.

AMD is still a threat to Intel, in data centers, HPC, and now mobile tablets and the whole light an thin market. AMD helped define light and thin market a few years ago, and Intel decided to make it more official with ultrabooks to look more like MacBook air. Basically, thinner and with good quality components. Now AMD's latest offerings are going to invade the ultra-book market at lower pricing and better graphics performance, with good enough cpu performance. Intel developed Xeon Phi to combat the HPC losses going to AMD and Nvidia, and the upcoming AMD freedom based products, including AMD's own 64-bit ARM processor implementation. What AMD has really scaled back is the high performance consumer market, even though they still have offerings for it. AMD won't completely mature until the HSA architecture is both fully implemented and the world adopts it. Seeing that the best in mobile computing is on the team with AMD, it has a better chance of wide adoption. Today, Intel has all the backing and push for new software optimizations when it comes to cpu instructions and hardware. HSA will level that playing field with all of Intel's competition, who are trying to be better without huge CAPEX.

ephud, because the production process and yields at TSMC has been better and faster to market. I never said GloFo was doing AMD any favors this past couple years, but that doesn't mean it cannot get better.

13feb, your comments dont really hold water. First off, my AMD purchase in October following a selloff, has returned 45% to date, so why argue with a factual statement? You consider that a small bump?

If you understood the computing strategy in the next gen console with both an AMD APU and GPU, and that games will be coded to take specific advantage of the AMD GPGPU performance lead, then next gen PC games of the same title and company will also. It also makes meaningful steps towards HSA, that AMD leads the way with the biggest companies in semis, other than Intel and Nvdia.

AMD has already penetrated the HPC market with their higher performing GPUs. CUDA is a big resistance for old cusomters to change, but new customers may prefer the value of an AMD Opteron, AMD Radeon combination.

Aloradus, your analysis of AMD being dominated on all fronts is a wild exageration. Nvidia has no GPU technology advantage, their customer support is not that great, and because they get some drivers better, doesnt mean AMD isnt constantly improveing theirs. Do you really think Nvidia's Kepler release means they will remain the leader? One product cycle defines the market? That does not make sense. AMD also performs better on many applications than Kepler, so I dont understand this belief that Nvidia is wildly superior. Superior in marketing and hype has always been Nvidia's way, acquiring the competition and making proprietary platforms to help them compete, compared to the open architecture that AMD promotes.

Quoted from an article on the register"AMD is not shy about ranking its new Opteron 6380, the top-bin 115 watt parts with 16 cores spinning at 2.5GHz, against the Xeon E5-2690, the top-bin Intel Xeon E5-2600 processor with eight cores (but 16 threads) spinning at 2.9GHz and burning 135 watts."

"the regular Opteron 6380 offers roughly the same performance on memory-intensive workloads popular in the HPC community as the E5-2690, but costs about half as much at list price"

And my wordsSo I guess, when you really have to do real work, AMD is a lot more performance for the price and at a lower TDP. And on top of that, it is a drop in replacement for previous generations.